Piracy has been a problem in Somali waters for at least ten years. However, the number of attempted and successful attacks has risen over the last three years. … The only period during which piracy virtually vanished around Somalia was during the six months of rule by the Islamic Courts Union in the second half of 2006. This indicates that a functioning government in Somalia is capable of controlling piracy. After the removal of the courts piracy re-emerged. (p3)

Piracy returned and has increased since the US/Ethiopian invasion of Somalia at the end of December 2006. A Somali government with some support from Somali people can actually govern. But the US and the Ethiopians decided to crush it, resulting in humanitarian disaster and the return of piracy.

7 Responses to “Who can stop the pirates?”

Blackwater Worldwide and other private security firms — some with a reputation for being quick on the trigger in Iraq — are joining the battle against pirates plaguing one of the world’s most important shipping lanes off the coast of Somalia.

The growing interest among merchant fleets to hire their own firepower is encouraged by the U.S. Navy and represents a new and potential lucrative market for security firms scaling back operations in Iraq.

But some maritime organizations told The Associated Press that armed guards may increase the danger to ships’ crews or that overzealous contractors might accidentally fire on fishermen.

The record in Iraq of security companies like Blackwater, which is being investigated for its role in the fatal shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians in 2007, raises concerns about unregulated activity and possible legal wrangles.

“Security companies haven’t always had the lightest of touches in Iraq, and I think Somalia is a pretty delicate situation,” said Roger Middleton, who wrote a recent report on piracy in Somalia for Chatham House, a think tank in London.

NATO, with a flotilla of warships due to arrive in Somali waters this weekend, is trying to work out legal and regulatory issues surrounding the use of armed contractors before adopting a position on private security companies.

But the U.S. Navy, part of the coalition already patrolling off the coast of Somalia, says the coalition cannot effectively patrol the 2.5 million square miles of dangerous waters and welcomes the companies.

“This is a great trend,” said Lt. Nate Christensen, a spokesman for the Bahrain-based U.S. 5th Fleet. “We would encourage shipping companies to take proactive measures to help ensure their own safety.”

…

Cyrus Mody, the manager of the International Maritime Bureau, says private security personnel can offer useful advice to ship captains, but he worries not all companies have clear rules of engagement or have sought legal advice about the consequences of opening fire.

So far hijackings are rarely fatal: One Chinese sailor was executed by pirates when ransom negotiations were going badly, and the two other known deaths resulted from a ricochet and a heart attack.

Mody says armed guards onboard ships may encourage pirates to use their weapons or spark an arms race between predators and prey. Currently, pirates often fire indiscriminately during an attack but don’t aim to kill or injure crew. The pirates usually use assault rifles but have rocket-propelled grenades; some reports also say they have mini-cannon.

“If someone onboard a ship pulls a gun, will the other side pull a grenade?” Mody asked.

British contractors stress the importance of intelligence and surveillance, a safe room for the crew to retreat to if the ship is boarded, and the range of non-lethal deterrence measures available.

“The standard approach is for (pirates) to come in with all guns blazing at the bridge because when a boat is stopped it’s easier to board,” said David Johnson, director of British security firm Eos. “But if you have guns onboard, you are going to escalate the situation. We don’t want to turn that part of the world into the Wild West.”

if they (meaning int’l militaries and/or private security companies) really wanted to help curb the hijackings, they could, for one, crackdown on the plethora of vessels engaged in illegal fishing & illegal dumping off somalia’s coasts. the majority of the hijackings are by volunteer coast guards defending somalia’s coasts against these two very real problems

the solution, of course, will be found on land, inside somalia. getting rid of the warlord TFG would be a big step. the ICU nearly eliminated all acts of piracy by late 2006. the TFG facilitates & reportedly directly benefits from it.

but if you read the comments in threads on the ‘pirates’ around the web, esp those w/ contributors from military & mercenary backgrounds, they have no time for facts or realistic assessments/solutions – it’s all ‘blow up a few pirate ships’ (basically, fishing boats) or ‘send them to davy jones’ locker’ kinda macho language. give a kid a hammer & everything looks like a nail. nevermind intl laws, maritime laws, or little things like how to distinguish a ‘pirate’ or somali coast guard from regular fishermen…

That certainly ups the dangers, having a bunch of hyped up adventurers wandering around looking for someone to shoot at. From what I read in the Chatham House report it sounds like the Somali pirates have been quite gentlemanly compared to pirates in some other parts of the world. And as usual, this response gets farther away than ever at addressing root causes.

On Sunday, a regional maritime official told Reuters international naval patrols may deter piracy off Somalia, but the kingpins remain untroubled enjoying the fruits of this year’s rash of hijacking in cities.

Andrew Mwangura, whose East African Seafarers’ Association monitors piracy, said while the patrols should calm the situation, the problem needed to be dealt with at its roots.

“There really isn’t a military solution. The boys on the boats are just the foot-soldiers,” said Mwangura.

“The commanders and generals, the financiers and the organisers behind it are in Dubai, Nairobi, Mombasa and even Canada and London, communicating via laptops.”

While some advocate a hard strike on the pirates, there are complicating factors: risks to hostages, different locations of the various gangs, problems identifying who pirates are before they have taken a boat and international legal complications once suspects are captured.

“They cannot just attack a ship, it’s not that simple,” Mwangura said.

Mwangura believes some Somali businessmen abroad and corrupt accomplices are the driving force for piracy. “Many are making good money from instability in Somalia,” he said.

previously mwangura has stated that his sources from w/i some of the groups involved point all the way to the top of the TFG and puntland admininstrations. he may be a bit hesitant to be so blunt in his stmts nowadays given that he is currently out on bail for the bogus charges in nairobi.

on the larger picture,if you didn’t catch m k bhadrakumar’s asia times online article, NATO reaches into the Indian Ocean, last week, i’d recommend it for a good recap on what’s going on wrt the new scramble

Evidently, NATO has been carefully planning its Indian Ocean deployment. The speed with which it dispatched the ships betrays an element of haste, likely anticipating that some among the littoral states in the Indian Ocean region might contest such deployment by a Western military alliance. By acting with lightning speed and without publicity, NATO surely created a fait accompli.

By any reckoning, NATO’s naval deployment in the Indian Ocean region is a historic move and a milestone in the alliance’s transformation. Even at the height of the Cold War, the alliance didn’t have a presence in the Indian Ocean.

…

To be sure, the littoral states would have taken note of the scrambling by NATO and India to deploy naval forces on a sea route that is crucial for the countries of the Asian region. Trade and imports of oil by China pass through this sea lane. All the same, China has merely reported on the NATO deployment without any comments. Russia, on the other hand, didn’t bother to report but preferred to swiftly respond.

…

In essence, Moscow has signaled to Washington (and Delhi and the other littoral states) that it, too, can play NATO’s game and has the capacity and the will to fight a “war on terror” in the Indian Ocean.

The point is, Somalia has no effective government and the claim by NATO (or India) to have received the permission/request from Mogadishu to undertake naval patrolling in that country’s territorial waters is untenable, to say the least. It is also a grey area as to whether such patrolling in the high seas will be in accordance with international law. NATO has taken cover under the pretext that the deployment is in response to a request by UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon, but then, Ban never acts without an eye on what Washington desires.

Clearly, Russia is establishing its toehold as a matter of principle, asserting that NATO and its “partners” in the region cannot arrogate to themselves the role of policemen in the Indian Ocean.

…

It is obvious that these first blasts of the new cold war have blown into the Indian Ocean region against the larger backdrop of big-power relations. A new command, Africom, has just taken over all US military operations in Africa with effect from October 1.

…

US officials are on record that Africom and NATO envisage an institutional linkup in the downstream. The overall US strategy is to incrementally bring NATO into Africa so that its future role in the Indian Ocean (and Middle East) region as the instrument of US global security agenda becomes optimal.

Mwangura, who goes to court in Mombasa on Thursday charged by the Kenyan government with “alarmist” information about one ship’s capture, believes a network of Somali businessmen abroad and corrupt accomplices are the driving force for piracy.

“Many people are making good money from instability in Somalia,” he said.

…

Mwangura said authorities in the region were turning a blind eye to illegal fishing, toxic dumping, drug- and gun-running, illegal charcoal shipments, and human trafficking in Somali waters that were all indirectly fuelling piracy.

“All these businesses inter-link. A foreign ship pays a warlord to be allowed to fish illegally off Somalia, and that money then funds the piracy,” he said.

“But when you start denouncing these things, powerful people get upset because you are spoiling their game.”

Mwangura said Somali pirates were still holding about eight ships, with more than 200 hostages aboard.

About 30 ships have been hijacked this year out of 87 attacks, according to his organisation which collects information from relatives, crews and other maritime groups.

The situation is so bad, some ships are considering going round the Cape of Good Hope off South Africa. “This would add several weeks to the duration of many ships’ voyages and would have severe consequences for international trade,” he said.

NAIROBI (AFP) — A spate of high-profile hijackings by Somali pirates has spurred western navies into action but experts argue that a handful of warships can do little to stamp out the lucrative piracy business.
…
NATO announced Monday that one of its ships had successfully carried out its first mission, escorting a vessel bringing supplies to African Union peacekeepers in Somalia.

The European Union (EU) has also pledged another three or four vessels by December in a bid to stem a phenomenon that is threatening world trade.

But experts say a beefed up naval presence can achieve little more than escort services for food aid deliveries.

“When it comes to suppressing piracy , an extra 10 or 11 ships is still not a huge amount of naval presence for a very large area,” said Roger Middleton, consultant researcher for London-based think-tank Chatham House.
…
Western navies with modern equipment are already stretched by conflicts elsewhere in the world and experts argue the number of foreign warships tasked with patrolling Somalia’s waters is unlikely to increase significantly in 2009.

Many observers argue sending ships is a band-aid approach which fails to look at the root causes of the phenomenon.

Most pirate groups operate from the coast of Puntland, a lawless breakaway state in northern Somalia. Observers say ineffective security forces there and poverty have allowed piracy to flourish.
…
“Sending warships can only have a limited effect… one of the best ways of combating piracy would be to stop the decline of Puntland,” said Stig Jarle Hansen, a Somalia expert with the Denmark-based Risk Intelligence group.

Hansen argues that not only is there no evidence of ties between pirates and Somalia’s Islamist Shebab organisation, which has been fighting the country’s government, but the Islamists were more effective than most in combating piracy.

A 2006 Ethiopian invasion to oust the Islamic Courts Union that had taken control of much of the country and support a fragile transitional government had a major impact on the surge in piracy.

“Before the invasion, the Shebab were probably the best pirate fighters the country has known,” said Hansen, also a senior researcher with the Norwegian Institute for Urban and regional Research.

However there are signs that major foreign players could seek to address some of the root causes and are mulling a “naval peacekeeping force” that also tackles illegal fishing and waste dumping in Somali waters, two issues that are often used as justifications by pirates.

US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa Affairs Jendayi Frazer has called upon the leaders of Uganda, Ethiopia and Kenya to extend the mandate for the installed TFG (“Transitional Federal Government”) whose tenure is due to ran out within six months.

WE LIVE IN A POLITICALLY WORLD,IF I HAD THE MONEY I WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND IT WOULD NOT BE PAYING RAMSOMS. IF WE CONTINUE THE CURRENT SITUATION THEY WILL GET BIGGER AND BETTER WEAPONS. A SKIFF HUNDREDS OF MILES OUT TO SEA WITH AK 47S AS FISHING POLES MAKES KNOW SENSE.

Hi CHUCK2251, It is not entirely clear to me what your message is here, but it is obvious you feel STRONGLY about it.

If you are interested in following the facts in Somalia, africa comments, monitors the news sources and provides ongoing information.

This assessment may interest you. In the words of Omar Sharmarke, Prime Minister, Transitional Federal Government of Somalia, the government the US supports:

The help we need is … restoring and enforcing Somalia’s economic exclusion zone so that Somalia can use its vast potential wealth in fish, oil and gas to fund its own future. Our fishermen currently watch as other countries plunder our waters. While we condemn it outright, it is no wonder these angry and desperate people resort to “fishing” for ships instead.

… The irony is that it would cost only a quarter of what is being spent right now on the warships trying to combat piracy, to fund our plan and actually solve the problems rather than simply chasing them round the Indian Ocean.